Suchergebnisse

AbstractAlthough the moral foundations of voting rights regulations have been the subject of widespread scrutiny, there is one aspect of the debate which has gone largely unquestioned and is currently accepted in every state's actual voting rights regulations. This is the requirement of prior residence, which stipulates that immigrants are granted the right to vote only once they have lived in the host country for a certain period of time. It is this requirement I call into question in this paper. Taking up the most plausible justifications for this requirement, I aim to put substantial pressure on its moral acceptability by arguing that it is not directly grounded by any of the principles that are currently defended as a means to determine thedemos, nor a proxy for some other morally relevant feature, nor a warrantor for abilities held to be significant for the right to vote.

Abstract: This article is a brief history of the struggle for Black voting rights and against determined opposition in Georgia since the end of the Civil War. After a brief period during Reconstruction when there was significant Black voting and Black representation in the Georgia legislature, Black people were systematically denied both voting rights and representation in the state of Georgia. After 1944, when the US Supreme Court ruled against the all-white primary, and especially after 1965, with the passage of the Voting Rights Act, white Georgia politicians tried any number of strategies to limit minority voting strength, from efforts to limit Black registration, to manipulating election districts and voting rules to keep African Americans from winning elective office. These efforts continued, and in many ways increased after the Supreme Court in 2013 ended the preclearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act. Nonetheless, the increasing demographic power of metro Atlanta, with its large minority population, was a key in 2020 to the narrow victory of Joseph Biden in the presidential race in Georgia, and the election of two liberal Democratic US Senators, including the first African American and Jew elected in the state's history.

"Through primary sources, this volume examines the history, evolution, and major contemporary controversies associated with voting rights in the United States, devoting particular attention to demographic groups including women, young people, people of color, and poor people"--

Who should have a right to participate in a polity's decision-making? Although the answers to this 'boundary problem' in democratic theory remain controversial, it is widely believed that the enfranchisement of tourists and children is unacceptable. Yet, the two most prominent inclusion principles in the literature – Robert Goodin's 'all (possibly) affected interests'-principle and the 'all subjected to law'-principle – both enfranchise those groups. Unsurprisingly, democratic theorists have therefore offered several reasons for nonetheless exempting tourists and children from the franchise. In this paper, I argue that their attempts fail. None of the proposed rationales can do the job without having unacceptable implications for the voting rights of other groups. I then develop a new specification of the affected interests-view, one that avoids such problems. According to my life plan-principle, a person is entitled to participate in a polity's decision-making if and only if its decisions will actually affect her autonomously chosen life plans, or prevent her from developing or revising plans of that kind. I show that this principle straightforwardly avoids enfranchising tourists and children, and thus improves upon its two prominent rivals. The paper ends by considering and rejecting two objections to my new principle.

Building African American voting rights in the nineteenth century / Xi Wang -- Disenfranchisement and its impact on the political system / Robert C. Lieberman -- The Supreme Court and Black disenfranchisement / Michael J. Klarman -- Rebuilding Black voting rights before the Voting rights act / Paula D. McClain ... [et al.] -- Making the Voting rights act / Stephen Tuck -- Extensions of the Voting rights act / Colin D. Moore -- Impact of the "core" Voting rights act on voting and officeholding / David A. Bositis -- The Voting rights act and its implications for three nonblack minorities / Pei-te Lien -- The Voting rights act and its discontents / Mark Rush -- Federal oversight of elections and partisan realignment / Laughlin McDonald

AbstractThere are few advanced democracies that simultaneously make voting as easy and as difficult as the US. This essay outlines some of the recent changes in voting rights and election law, with a particular attention to the causes and consequences of restrictive changes. I argue that both historically and today this pattern has been driven by strategic partisan calculation, which in the American context almost necessarily results in patterns of access and exclusion that fall sharply on lines of race, class, and civic status. The recent skirmishes in the "voting wars" are a continuation of this historical dynamic, enabled by the unique institutional context in which American elections take place, in which parties retain control over the parameters and administration of a highly fragmented electoral system. So long as this remains the case, and so long as there are relatively few institutions capable of checking the incentive to engage in partisan manipulation, the "voting wars" will continue and are likely even to intensify.

Law is an important instrument in protecting and upholding human rights in the state. In protecting and ensuring the enforcement of human rights in the state, it must be ensured that the law becomes an instrument in monitoring and even restricting public or state authorities so that there is no abuse of power, in many cases being the beginning of human rights violations. This research aims to examine and analyze the protection of human rights in the Indonesian Constitutional Law Post Amendment to the 1945 Constitution. This research uses normative legal research methods or literature studies, with materials in the form of secondary and tertiary legal materials. The main law material is the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia while the secondary material is legal literature that explains and analyzes the laws and regulations related to this research. The result of this research is that the right to vote is contained in various legal provisions, both international and national. Persons with disabilities, as part of Indonesian citizens are also entitled to be actively involved in political life in accordance with Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 25 of the Civil Rights Covenant, Article 28D paragraph (3), Article 28H Paragraph (2) and Article 28I Paragraph (2) the 1945 Constitution after the amendments and Article 43 Paragraphs (1) and (2) of Law no. 39/1999 on Human Rights emphasizes that every citizen has the right to get equal opportunities in government, both to be elected and to vote without discrimination.

This paper proposes a political economic analysis of public opinion in European Union countries toward migrants from poor countries. By focusing on redistributive policy, the analysis sheds light on specific determinants of public opinion. The theoretical analysis, based on the median voter framework, shows that one of the key variables affecting public opinion is the voting rights of migrants. Where migrants do not have the right to vote, their presence negatively impacts the poorest natives. In countries where migrants enjoy voting rights, they are able to vote on redistributive policy; therefore, the impact of migration on natives' welfare is fundamentally different. After the theoretical analysis, the paper proposes an empirical analysis of Europeans' attitudes toward non-Western migrants in European Union countries. This empirical analysis confirms the decisive impact of migrants' voting rights. It shows that, in EU countries, the more educated natives are significantly less favorable to migrants from poor countries when the latter have the right to vote. Adapted from the source document.

This study applies insights from principal‐agent models to examine whether and how the language assistance provisions of the Voting Rights Act, Sections 203 and 4(f)(4), affect Latino representation. Using panel data from 1984–2012, we estimate two‐stage models that consider the likelihood and extent of Latino board representation for a sample of 1,661 school districts. In addition, we examine how policy design as well as federal oversight and enforcement shape implementation and compliance with the language assistance provisions. Our findings not only provide the first systemic evidence that the language assistance provisions have a direct effect on Latino representation, but also link the efficacy of the language assistance provisions to the duration and consistency of coverage and the presence of federal elections observers. Overall, our study underscores the continued need for federal government involvement in protecting the voting rights of underrepresented groups, in this case, language minority citizens.